Just as justice has to be seen to be done, so must elections be seen to be just.

IF we cut through the noise and the chase, we will agree that all right-thinking Malaysians want free and fair elections so that they can elect the government of their choice without anyone depriving them of that right by foul means.

The Government says it wants it, the Opposition wants it and the people want it too — everybody wants free, fair and clean elections.

If that’s the case then there’s no problem. All it takes is for the election authorities to do the needful.

The divide arises because the Government and the Elections Commission (EC) maintain that all is fair and well, while the Opposition and a large section of the population do not, maintaining in particular that the electoral rolls are being manipulated by the addition of illegal immigrants.

It does not help too that there were attempts to hastily amend the election laws, a move which has been subsequently withdrawn.

There is only one way to bridge the divide. The EC has to not only ensure but show that all the actions that it takes are in furtherance of free and fair elections.

Only then can it restore confidence in the electoral system and assure the public that the elections will indeed be free, fair and clean.

Here are 10 ways that the EC can promote free and fair elections and be seen to be doing so:

1. Keep electoral rolls open for inspection at all times. Not only should the EC do this but it should promptly respond to and give explanations for anomalies that have been brought to its attention. This should be done publicly.

2. Inform those whose constituencies have been changed promptly. If for whatever reason, a person’s constituency has been changed, then the EC must inform the constituent immediately and explain clearly the need for the change. That will help clear any confusion immediately.

3. Ensure that all parties continue to have a right to observe the election process. Observers from all parties must always have the right to have their representatives present in the polling booth to ensure that elections are held according to the law. Under no circumstances must such rights be taken away.

4. Count ballots in the polling booths in the presence of observers. This is the best way to ensure that there is no stuffing of ballot boxes as counting can begin as soon as polling is over in the presence of observers. This is how it has been done in the past and there is no need to change it.

5. Open polling of armed forces and police personnel to observation. Even if polling takes place in security areas, observers must be allowed in to monitor the polling process to ensure that there is no pressure put on them by their superiors to vote en-bloc for a particular candidate.

6. Have safeguards to ensure postal ballots are tamper-proof. This will entail amongst others sealing ballot boxes in the presence of independent observers and opening them in the presence of other independent observers too.

7. Allow election observers from accredited agencies. If our elections are free and fair, what’s there to hide? Let anyone from anywhere come and observe the elections and see for themselves how fair and free it is.

8. Move towards automatic voter registration. Considering that each adult Malaysian has an electronic identity card, it is inexplicable why automatic voter registration based on the MyKad is yet to be implemented.

9. Ensure fair media time for all parties. Considering that most mainstream media is dominated by parties friendly to the ruling government, it is necessary to ensure that there is fairer election coverage so that Malaysians can vote on a true and fair representation of the facts.

10. Lengthen the campaign period. The campaign period should be lengthened to at least a month so that major issues are given enough time for a proper airing and the public have enough time to make up their minds over who they want to vote for.

An election is not just about processes but about confidence too.

The Malaysian public and the international community must have the confidence that they can rely on the election results.

If for any reason that confidence is lacking, then it is up the EC to take measures to ensure that confidence returns.

The only way it can do that is to take the right actions and be totally transparent about them.

Independent consultant and writer P. Gunasegaram likes this quote from James Freeman Clarke: A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.

"We know we were sloppy. We know we were stupid. We know there was bad judgment," Dimon (PIC left) CEO of JPMorgan said in an interview with NBC television to be broadcast on "Meet the Press" on Sunday.

NEW YORK/LONDON (Reuters) - JPMorgan Chase Co lost $15 billion in market value and a notch in its credit ratings on Friday while a chorus of regulators and politicians reacted to its surprise $2 billion trading loss by demanding stiffer oversight for the banking industry.

The loss by one of Wall Street's most respected banks embarrassed chief executive Jamie Dimon, a leader lauded for steering his bank through the fallout from the 2008 financial crisis without reporting a loss.

"We know we were sloppy. We know we were stupid. We know there was bad judgment," Dimon said in an interview with NBC television to be broadcast on "Meet the Press" on Sunday.

He said it wasn't clear whether the bank had broken any laws or violated any rules. "We've had audit, legal, risk, compliance, some of our best people looking at all of that."

The loss also invited regulatory scrutiny for a man who had all but led the charge to limit it, criticizing the so-called Volcker rule to ban proprietary trading by big banks.

The New York Times reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission has opened a preliminary investigation into JPMorgan's accounting practices and public disclosures about the trading loss.

On Friday, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro told reporters: "It's safe to say that all the regulators are focused on this."

The debacle sparked new fears about big banks and prompted Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher, who has called for the breakup of the top five U.S. banks, to say he is worried the biggest banks do not have adequate risk management.

The fallout extended across much of the banking sector, with shares of some of Wall Street's top names declining on Friday. Among others, Citigroup dropped 4.2 percent, Goldman Sachs fell 3.9 percent and Bank of America slipped 1.9 percent.

JPMorgan was far away the worst performer, however, falling 9.3 percent on a day when some 212 million of its shares traded, the most volume in its history.

Fitch Ratings cut JPMorgan's debt ratings a notch and put all of the ratings of the bank and its subsidiaries on negative ratings watch.

While Fitch saw the size of the loss as manageable, "the magnitude of the loss and ongoing nature of these positions implies a lack of liquidity," the ratings agency said.

"Fitch believes the potential reputational risk and risk governance issues raised at JPM are no longer consistent with an 'AA-' rating," it said.

Standard & Poor's put JPMorgan and its banking units on a negative outlook, but affirmed its current ratings.

In a conference call disclosing the problem on Thursday, Dimon said the $2 billion in losses could rise by a further $1 billion, and acknowledged they were linked to a London-based credit trader Bruno Iksil. Nicknamed the 'London Whale,' Iksil amassed an outsized position which hedge funds bet against.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, meanwhile, had been aware of JPMorgan's big trading loss and is currently monitoring the situation, according to a source close to the situation.

The Fed, which is JPMorgan's primary regulator, aims to ensure banks are sufficiently capitalized to withstand such trading mistakes, not to prevent them, the source said.

'STAKES ARE TOO HIGH'

The exact nature of the trading loss is still unclear, although sources said a host of asset managers, arbitrageurs and hedge funds were on the other side of the bet, viewing it as good value and a effective way to insure portions of their portfolio.

Blue Mountain, a hedge fund with offices in New York and London, was among those on the other side of JPMorgan's trade, according to two people familiar with the situation.

Dimon will undoubtedly be pressed by investors for more details about what exactly went wrong when he hosts the bank's annual shareholder meeting on Tuesday in Tampa, Florida.

A national union on Friday urged shareholders to approve a stockholder resolution calling for an independent board chairman at JPMorgan. Dimon currently holds the chairman and CEO titles.

"The stakes are too high to leave Jamie Dimon unsupervised," said Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, which sponsored the proposal. "Dimon denied that the ‘London Whale' was making risky bets, and now that this has turned out to be a fish story, shareholders need to step in."

Dimon had parlayed his bank's reputation as a white knight during the financial crisis into a position as the de facto representative fighting against excessive post-crisis regulation.

"What concerns me is risk management, size, scope," said Dallas Federal Reserve Bank's Fisher answer to a question about JPMorgan's trading loss. "At what point do you get to the point that you don't know what's going on underneath you? That's the point where you've got too big."

The trader at the center of the storm, Iksil, who graduated in engineering from the Ecole Centrale in Paris in 1991, was not available for comment. The Frenchman, and the Chief Investment Office (CIO) where he works, are known by rival credit traders for taking extremely large positions.

"He's a really nice bloke. A quiet bloke. He's not an arrogant trader, he's quite the opposite. He's very charming," one former colleague at JPMorgan said of Iksil, whom he said was married with "a couple of kids".

JPMorgan characterized the costly trading strategy that led to the loss as a hedge, rather than as proprietary trade, or a bet with the bank's own money. But that line has been difficult for regulators and experts to define as they seek to craft the Volcker rule.

One friend and former JPMorgan colleague said Iksil and the team were not carrying out proprietary trading in disguise, and that the unit's activities were known at the highest levels of the bank.

"The CIO does not do prop trading, let's be clear on that ... It involves taking positions in the form of investments, trades, credit-default swaps, or other, with the aim of rebalancing the risks of JPMorgan's balance sheet.

"The information comes from the very top of the bank and I do not even think that the CIO team members at Bruno's level are given the full picture," the ex-colleague said.

Iksil was brought into the CIO unit to head its credit desk, an asset class it had not previously covered, a person who worked in the unit said. It built up large credit positions over several years through trades which were vetted by management and the losses now likely resulted from a combination of these trades going wrong, the person said.

The CIO desk had grown rapidly in the past five years and was given free range to trade in a whole range of financial products, the only exception being commodities, they added. The CIO is run by New York-based Ina Drew, who is Chief Investment Officer.

Credit market traders said other banks have comparable functions to JPMorgan's CIO. The French banks, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and UBS were all cited as examples of large treasury functions that hedge credit exposures in similar ways.

"The argument that financial institutions do not need the new rules to help them avoid the irresponsible actions that led to the crisis of 2008 is at least $2 billion harder to make today," U.S. Representative Barney Frank said in a statement.

About Me

Email:drhalimah@selangor.gov.my

PROGRAM MODAL INSAN S.P.I.E.S

KEMPEN PRU 13: HENTI GUNA JABATAN KERAJAAN

LAGU TEMA SPIES

Quranic Verse For The Day

And by the sun and its brightness. And by the moon as it follows it (the sun). And by the day as it shows up (the suns) brightness. And by the night as it conceals it (the sun). And by the heaven and Him Who built it. And by the earth and Him Who spread it. And by Nafs (Adam or a person or a soul, etc.), and Him Who perfected him in proportion.Then He showed him what is wrong for him and what is right for him. Indeed he succeeds who purifies his ownself (i.e. obeys and performs all that Allah ordered, by following the true Faith of Islamic Monotheism and by doing righteous good deeds). And indeed he fails who corrupts his ownself (i.e. disobeys what Allah has ordered by rejecting the true Faith of Islamic Monotheism or by following polytheism, etc. or by doing every kind of evil wicked deeds).( Demi matahari dan sinarnya di pagi hari. Demi bulan apabila ia mengiringi. Demi siang apabila ia menampakkan diri. Demi malam apabila ia menutupi. Demi langit dan seluruh binaannya. Demi bumi dan yang ada di hamparannya. Demi jiwa dan penyempurnaannya. Allah mengilhamkan sukma keburukan (kefasikan) dan kebaikan (ketaqwaan). Beruntunglah siapa yang mensucikannya dan rugilah siapa yang mengotorinya. ).(Asysams, Chapter 91 , Verse 1-10)